Displacing uncomfortable carbon accounting knowledge: how avoided emission models justify the status quo

Purpose This paper answers calls for an in-depth, critical evaluation of carbon accounting practices by examining the missing link between knowing about and acting on carbon emissions. It explores how managers may decide to ignore uncomfortable absolute carbon emission calculations and instead develop home-made carbon accounting models of avoided emissions in order to support the status quo. Design/methodology/approach This in-depth single case study based on 23 interviews and substantial non-participant observation (28 days) builds on the notion of displacement as a discursive mode of ignorance to better understand why knowledge generated by Carbon Accounting Tools (CAT) can be considered uncomfortable and may in fact encourage the status quo. Findings The case study shows that the voluntary production of carbon accounting calculations is not always synonymous with improved carbon emission performance. Focusing on home-made carbon accounting models, instead of on uncomfortable absolute carbon accounting calculations, can have a negative, rather than a positive, effect on environment-friendly decisions. Furthermore, in the case examined, this decision was not viewed favorably throughout the company, with some employees expressing their unease that the company had merely replaced an uncomfortable metric with a more favorable one. Originality/value The study builds on the concepts of displacement and uncomfortable knowledge to argue that CAT that avoid creating tensions with a company’s economic growth objectives have little impact on promoting sustainable practices. By using carbon accounting models to focus on avoided emissions, managers can deliberately move attention away from uncomfortable absolute carbon accounting calculations, thereby legitimating the status quo.